Generate a structured brief — facts, issues, held, reasoning, and significance — for this case in seconds. Or browse the verbatim judgment via the source links below.
On 23 rd May 2014 Judge Frankish granted permission noting that it was arguable that the Respondent has �achieved� [sic] the higher standard of proof in alleging forgery. Thus the matter comes before me.
There is common ground that there is no higher standard of proof in these proceedings. Where the civil standard is to be applied then it is on the balance of probabilities and the authority for that proposition now somewhat trite is the House of Lords case of Re: B [2008 ] UKHL 35 .
Now the Secretary of State submits that there is an element of perversity in this case. She submits that having found that the document itself was not genuine it was perverse to find that it had not been proved that there had been dishonesty but indeed that was the very issue in the Court of Appeal decision in AA (Nigeria) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2010] EWCA Civ 773 to which the judge at paragraph 31 properly directed himself.
Auto-extracted from BAILII. Full structured brief in progress — the source links below give you the verbatim judgment in the meantime.
Multiple official and mirror sources — pick whichever loads cleanly on your network.
Common Room
0 comments · About the Common Room →
No comments yet — start the discussion.
Voted-best comments help future students and feed Caselaw's AI study tools.